My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 02 24
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2020 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 02 24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/20/2020 10:38:39 AM
Creation date
4/8/2020 11:27:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
2/24/2020
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />January 13th, 2020 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />Klemme stated that she thought the Old Town Overlay served the same purpose as a <br />Historic District, except that the Overlay was a voluntary and incentive-based program. <br />She thought they were otherwise the same thing. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that there could be dramatic changes if the City moved away from a <br />voluntary program, but there could be conversations about those issues in the future. <br /> <br />Dunlap asked about addressing design guidelines. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that the Old Town Overlay was going to be in review, which would <br />address design guidelines and change zoning. <br /> <br />Klemme asked how that would work with the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that almost everything on the Planning Commission was based on <br />numbers, whereas Preservation could consider intent. Design guidelines dealt more in <br />measurables like percentages. <br /> <br />Dunlap stated that guidelines were not requirements. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that generally the guidelines needed to be followed. <br /> <br />Klemme stated that the order of projects for 2020 were appropriate and that some of the <br />projects went together. She suggested holding preservation training for city residents. <br />She asked if there was a flyer for the public about the program’s incentives. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that staff had drafts of flyers. <br /> <br />Klemme suggested hosting an event at the library instead of relying on mailings, one <br />about dos-and-don’t about preservation and one about explaining the City’s program. <br /> <br />Selvoski replied that she had been having conversations with the Sustainability Board <br />and there might be a logical connection with the sustainability side of historic <br />preservation. <br /> <br />Dunlap agreed that sustainability could complement or conflict preservation. <br /> <br />Haley asked for public comment. <br /> <br />Andy Johnson, DAJ Design 922A Main Street, noted that he thought the preservation <br />training should be open to the public. He suggested that design professionals, builders, <br />and other stakeholders should receive the training alongside everyone else. He also <br />suggested a careful review of HSA requirements, which were currently similar to the <br />Department of the Interior requirements, and therefore might require recalibration. He <br />also asked for feedback on the quality of completed HSAs in helping the Commission to
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.